On Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 11:51:19AM +0200, Sven LUTHER wrote: > I think i agree with you in principle, but what do you propose to do with the > non-free packages ? just remove them from debian disks ?
The point at issue here is not "disks" per se, but rather the act of _distribution_. The first (first, mind you) promise that the Social Contract makes is that the Debian distribution will not contain free software. We are now moving into a period where the on-line distribution of Debian is at least as significant as the disk based distribution. My expectation is that on-line distribution will eventually eclipse and replace physical distribution entirely. This raises some compelling questions about what the heck we are trying to say with the Social Contract. I think that it is clear that our overarching mission is to provide a Linux distribution consisting entirely of free software. I think it is also clear that we are not to adopt an antagonistic or counter-productive stance towards proprietary software. From the ordering of the principles of the Social Contract, however, I think that it is clear that the mission of producing a free distribution overrides the requirement of aiding commercial software. In short, I think that there are details of the fifth article of the Social Contract that were poorly stated and need to be clarified because of certain progress in the technologies of software distribution. The fifth article should be reworded to state that we are committed to aiding commercial software vendors (or packagers) in the process of understanding and working with our distribution. This aid of course does not include violating our primary directive of producing and distributing an entirely free software Linux distribution. If you want to run free software on our system and need help understanding what we are doing, we will help you. However, we will not distribute your stinking capitalist dirty closed source garbage. *grin* > What will happen to them, would they still be able to use the BTS for their > packages ? Or should they make provision for having their own apt-gettable > repository for people to download. I think not everyone has the ressources to > do that. I should think so, as this constitutes "aid" rather than "distribution". Yes? -- ___________________________________________________________________ Ean Schuessler Freak Brainfood, Inc. Freak Central --- Some or all of the above signature may be a joke
